(25-07-2016 04:16 PM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote: Seeing reports on some websites that wikileaks is planning another round of email leaks that should reopen an FBI investigation.

What the fuck? Are you talking about Infowars or WND? LOCK HER UP! LOCK HER UP! LOCK HER UP! You are not only not capable of seeing past your own prejudices, you do not even realize you have them. You're not an educated man are you? .... wait, was that elitist of me? Or just the fucking truth.

(25-07-2016 04:16 PM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote: Seeing reports on some websites that wikileaks is planning another round of email leaks that should reopen an FBI investigation.

What the fuck? Are you talking about Infowars or WND? LOCK HER UP! LOCK HER UP! LOCK HER UP! You are not only not capable of seeing past your own prejudices, you do not even realize you have them. You're not an educated man are you? .... wait, was that elitist of me? Or just the fucking truth.

Wikileaks just released a bunch of emails that nobody took seriously at first but now have caused the ouster of the DNC chair. They've openly said this was only the first round of released emails.

"Evil will always triumph over good, because good is dumb." - Lord Dark Helmet

(25-07-2016 04:21 PM)GirlyMan Wrote: What the fuck? Are you talking about Infowars or WND? LOCK HER UP! LOCK HER UP! LOCK HER UP! You are not only not capable of seeing past your own prejudices, you do not even realize you have them. You're not an educated man are you? .... wait, was that elitist of me? Or just the fucking truth.

Wikileaks just released a bunch of emails that nobody took seriously at first but now have caused the ouster of the DNC chair. They've openly said this was only the first round of released emails.

The fuck that got to do with the FBI? Do you just pull these speculations out of your ass? Wait, do you even know what speculation is? You're an Alex Jones aficionado aren't you? This is why you have problems getting proper health insurance.

(26-07-2016 03:13 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: Is that the same source you've regularly denigrated over the last few months?

What changed, aside from their prediction comporting with your hopes? Why are they now a credible source to you?

Be specific.

Finish my sentence. "although I think they made a big mistake originally putting Trump's chances at less than 1%. Silver was man enough to admit his error and I respect that."

He did. But you do not have the intellectual capacity to understand his explanation. Hell you don't even have the intellectual capacity to read his explanation. Hell, you probably didn't even know he published an explanation. Your uninformed respect don't mean much of anything. And your respect will no doubt disappear as soon as his model starts considering Hillary's bump from the DNC. 'Cause you are disingenuous and shit.

(26-07-2016 07:07 AM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote: Finish my sentence. "although I think they made a big mistake originally putting Trump's chances at less than 1%. Silver was man enough to admit his error and I respect that."

It would be stupid to ignore Nate's ability. He made the mistake of not taking Trump seriously, and that made me question his objectiveness. Because he admittedly doesn't like Trump, he allowed bias to sneak into his assessment, originally giving Trump less than 1% chance.

He has since corrected this, and I hope he remains neutral. I'll take him at his word. Right now, one of 538's models predicts a Trump victory, the other two predict a Clinton victory. As long as they use facts and not feelings, they're going to be a reliable source of information.

"Evil will always triumph over good, because good is dumb." - Lord Dark Helmet